Observational studyBMC primary care2022
Patient experience (PX) among individuals with disabilities in Japan: a mixed-methods study.
Observational study in BMC primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Primary care experiences of family caregivers using the same medical facility as their care recipient or a different facility.Journal of general and family medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeople with disabilities (PWDs) tend to be disadvantaged in terms of receiving preventive medicine and medical checkups. About 7.6% of the Japanese population is estimated to have a disability. Although patient experience (PX) is an effective measure of patient-centeredness, little is known about the PX of PWDs. The present study aimed to compare the PX of PWDs with those of the non-disabled both quantitatively and qualitatively.
methodsThe present study involved a questionnaire survey and a free-response question on the survey form. The quantitative part of the study involved a comparison of JPCAT scores between PWDs and non-disabled participants. JPCAT is composed of five primary care principles: First contact, Longitudinality, Coordination, Comprehensiveness (service provided and service available), and Community orientation. Descriptive statistics were used to assess age, sex, years of education, self-rated health status, and type of disability (for PWDs). Multivariable analysis was performed using a linear regression model to detect differences between PWDs and non-disabled participants in total and domain-specific JPCAT scores. The model included the following confounding variables: age, sex, years of education, and self-rated health status. The qualitative part of the study involved a thematic analysis of answers to the free-response question.
resultsData from 338 participants (169 PWDs and 169 non-disabled participants) were analyzed (response rate of 36% for PWDs). After adjusting for age, sex, years of education, and self-rated health status, PWD scores were significantly lower than those of non-disabled participants for the Longitudinality, Community Orientation, and Comprehensiveness (services available) domains of the JPCAT. Qualitative analysis yielded six themes, each of which was further divided to have Disability-Specific and General themes.
conclusionsJPCAT scores in PWDs were significantly lower than those of non-disabled participants for the Longitudinality, Community Orientation, and Comprehensiveness (services available) domains. Qualitative analysis revealed that PWDs shared several themes with non-disabled participants, but also to face unique challenges due to disabilities, such as the lack of a health care provider familiar with disabilities and the insurance transition at age 65, a unique feature of the Japanese health care system.
trial registrationThe study was a non-interventional, observational research trial, and thus registration was not required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.